John T Capo1, Eitan Melamed2, Benhoor Shamian1, Scott R Hadley1, Whitney Ng Lai1, Kenny Gerszberg1, Steven Rivero1, Paolo Caravaggi1. 1. New York University Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, NY; Woodhull Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY; Movement Analysis Laboratory, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy; Joint Motion Laboratory, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ; Biomedical Engineering Department, School of Engineering, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. 2. New York University Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, NY; Woodhull Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY; Movement Analysis Laboratory, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy; Joint Motion Laboratory, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ; Biomedical Engineering Department, School of Engineering, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. Electronic address: Eitan.melamed@nyumc.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine in a cadaver model which, among 5 fixation methods for proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthrodesis, has the greatest stiffness. METHODS: Thirty-five cadaver digits were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 fixation groups: oblique K-wire with coronal intraosseous wiring, tension-band wire (TBW), dorsal plate, intramedullary linked screw (IMS), and 90/90 wiring (90/90W). Testing was done by applying bending moments to the PIP joint in the sagittal and frontal planes. The force/displacement curves were used to estimate the stiffness of each construct. Ultimate strength was determined by loading to failure in extension. RESULTS: The IMS had significantly higher stiffness than all wiring constructs in all planes of motion and significantly greater stiffness in extension than the dorsal plate. The IMS stiffness exceeded 10 N/mm across all bending directions and showed an ultimate strength of 21 N. The plate demonstrated higher stiffness in radial bending than the oblique K-wire with coronal intraosseous wiring and TBW. There were no differences in stiffness between the IMS and plate in all modes of testing except extension. Load-to-failure testing of the devices showed the IMS device to be significantly stronger than the TBW, 90/90W, and plating constructs. CONCLUSIONS: The IMS resisted larger bending moments than all wiring constructs and showed the greatest ultimate strength when compared with 3 of the tested arthrodesis techniques. The plate was significantly better than 2 of the wiring constructs, but only in radial bending. No differences were found between the, TBW, and 90/90W when compared with each other. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The stiffness necessary for a successful PIP joint fusion has not been quantified, but according to this study, the IMS was the most favorable biomechanical construct for initial stability.
PURPOSE: To determine in a cadaver model which, among 5 fixation methods for proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthrodesis, has the greatest stiffness. METHODS: Thirty-five cadaver digits were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 fixation groups: oblique K-wire with coronal intraosseous wiring, tension-band wire (TBW), dorsal plate, intramedullary linked screw (IMS), and 90/90 wiring (90/90W). Testing was done by applying bending moments to the PIP joint in the sagittal and frontal planes. The force/displacement curves were used to estimate the stiffness of each construct. Ultimate strength was determined by loading to failure in extension. RESULTS: The IMS had significantly higher stiffness than all wiring constructs in all planes of motion and significantly greater stiffness in extension than the dorsal plate. The IMS stiffness exceeded 10 N/mm across all bending directions and showed an ultimate strength of 21 N. The plate demonstrated higher stiffness in radial bending than the oblique K-wire with coronal intraosseous wiring and TBW. There were no differences in stiffness between the IMS and plate in all modes of testing except extension. Load-to-failure testing of the devices showed the IMS device to be significantly stronger than the TBW, 90/90W, and plating constructs. CONCLUSIONS: The IMS resisted larger bending moments than all wiring constructs and showed the greatest ultimate strength when compared with 3 of the tested arthrodesis techniques. The plate was significantly better than 2 of the wiring constructs, but only in radial bending. No differences were found between the, TBW, and 90/90W when compared with each other. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The stiffness necessary for a successful PIP joint fusion has not been quantified, but according to this study, the IMS was the most favorable biomechanical construct for initial stability.
Authors: Seung Hun Woo; Sang Ho Kwak; Hyo Seok Jang; Dong Hee Kim; Jang Hyeon Seo; Sang Hyun Lee Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 2.562